click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130216
20130216
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
that with chuck hagel. 84% of americans for conservative action, voting record in his canner radio, voting for the bush tax cuts, voted for the war in iraq, voted against no child left behind but was a small government conservative, and republicans right now, particularly tea party, are not looking for converts like the democrats were with joe leiberman. they're looking for heretics. and they see in chuck hagel who never endorsed barack obama, was friendly with him, traveled with him, but didn't endorse him. they see this terrible heretic. and it's really, that is where the republicans are right now. they are looking for heretics instead of converts. and i think it's apparent in the tea party. but i think it's apparent in the ranks of the entire ranks of the party. >> you have effectively turned the corner to the next thing i wanted to ask you about, and this is the hagel confirmation. the republicans, i gather, we're told t is unprecedented, blocking the nomination or the confirmation so far of the man president obama wants to be his defense secretary. >> it's not quite unprecedented for
hagel into the defense post he's nominated for in president obama's cabinet and yesterday they left town for nine days. joining me now jake sherman, congressional reporter, molly bald, national political reporter at "the atlantic." molly, today's "new york times" california democrat barbara boxer likened the block that republicans like texas senator ted cruz have put on chuck hagel to mccarthyism. what was the point of prolonging this hagel vote until after everyone reconvenes? >> well, i think that republicans started out with some legitimate questions about this, and they would say they're just trying to get those answered and need more time. it was harry reid who called this vote as sort of an attempt to call their bluff saying this is enough, you're delaying this for no reason but i don't think this is going to help the republicans' image especially when they're going around saying we're not actually trying to stop this nomination. we're not actually filibustering, so what are they doing? i think especially for people who are sick of the sort of washington games, this isn't a good im
your experience in research, what do you think of the reaction against chuck hagel's being secretary of defense, a man whose clearly reluctant to send soldiers into harm's way having been there himself. >> the question was about the former senator chuck hagel, a man with two purple hearts, shrapnel in his test, and all the controversy over him. without weighing in on him per se. i like the idea of people who served in uniform having a say in policy decisions in which men in uniform and women in uniform are sent into harm's way, as a general thought. i don't have a position on whether he should be secretary of defense. i do think it's interesting, and the last three or four weeks i've wished my show was up and running so we could talk about this at some length, but i think it's interesting, john kerry, chuck hagel, two men with, i think, five purple hearts between them, and both of them, although, they votedded for iraq and afghanistan, can't say they are completely doves, although, maybe john kerry didn't vote for iraq. i can't keep it straight, but in any case, what it does, and we
of assignments for cheadle for chuck hagel's nomination to a vote this week, do you think harry reid made a mistake enough for sydney will reform the filibuster? >> back to questions about the space i'm in. after 36 years i love my job and integrated server. read the press accounts and get the magazines, but i'm not there and they've got a tough job. by the way, i am optimistic. i am optimistic about the congress. republicans and democrats in my view are going to once again make that institution is in port, vibrant and vital as it has been historically, so i'm sort of a loud, but i believe very strongly. i put on a list of people have great confidence and hope to make a difference in all of this. i happen to be an advocate at the simple question is the filibuster rule. that's what the founders intended. if you create nothing more than a year and i can, a, in your image, what is the point of having two chambers? there's a reason why the senate is a counterbalance, with a popular elected official majority rules of the senate was the place for the minority rules in a sense, the proposal to f
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)